In People v. Lopez (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 132, the defendant was found in possession of a loaded firearm. (Id. at p. 135.) In People v. Lopez, police officers were called to a park after the defendant had been seen with a handgun. The defendant became combative when approached by the officers, and reached toward the front of his pants several times. After the officers subdued the defendant, they found a loaded handgun in his pants pocket. He was convicted and sentenced separately for unlawful possession of a firearm and for unlawful possession of ammunition. (Id. at p. 134.) On appeal, the court reversed the separate sentence for the ammunition offense. "While possession of an unloaded firearm alone can aid a person committing another crime, possession of ammunition alone will not." (Id. at p. 138.) In prohibiting certain individuals from possessing either firearms or ammunition, the Legislature intended "to prohibit these persons from combining firearms with ammunition." (Ibid.) "While there may be instances when multiple punishment is lawful for possession of a firearm and ammunition, the instant case is not one of them. Where, as here, all of the ammunition is loaded into the firearm, an 'indivisible course of conduct' is present and section 654 precludes multiple punishment." (Ibid.) The defendant was sentenced to six years in state prison for unlawful possession of a firearm, along with a concurrent six-year term for unlawful possession of ammunition. All the ammunition in the defendant's possession had been loaded into the gun. Based on that circumstance, the Lopez court held that the sentence for unlawful possession of ammunition should have been stayed because the defendant had only one intent: to possess a loaded firearm. (Lopez, supra, 119 Cal.App.4th at p. 138.) In reaching this conclusion, the Lopez court turned to the legislative objectives behind the laws that barred felons from possessing guns or ammunition. "While possession of an unloaded firearm alone can aid a person committing another crime, possession of ammunition alone will not. The former may be used as a club and a victim may be fearful that the firearm is loaded. While the latter may be thrown at a victim, it is extremely unlikely that possession of bullets alone would scare anyone but the most timid. In combination, however, the mixture is lethal and that is why criminals have a penchant for loaded firearms.The Legislature has wisely declared that specified people should not possess firearms and/or ammunition. The obvious legislative intent is to prohibit these persons from combining firearms with ammunition. Appellant's obvious intent was to possess a loaded firearm." (Lopez, supra, 119 Cal.App.4th at p. 138.) While allowing multiple punishment for unlawful possession of ammunition that was loaded into a firearm would "parse the objective too finely," the Lopez court said "there may be instances when multiple punishment is lawful for possession of a firearm and ammunition, . . . but when all of the ammunition is loaded into the firearm, an 'indivisible course of conduct' is present and section 654 precludes multiple punishment." (Lopez, supra, 119 Cal.App.4th at p. 138, )